[littlegemsy]

Ooh. Or a sign inspector, an insect counter etc.

I may just have to do one as an insect counter...

[nobby.nobbs]

Like has been said, though I have to admit not wading through every reply, the Police received a report that someone thought something was suspicious.

We, and the OP, do not know what the background is here. There may well be many instances of things going on the the area or there could've been instances of criminal activity using that car park. Drug dealers, for instance, sometimes use locations like that to do their deals.

Yes on the bare facts that we have been told, sitting in a car does sound excessive reasons to knock on someone's door and ask them what they were doing! Though in the grand scheme of things that isn't exactly a Police state behaviour is it.

The ability or disability of the recipient to this attention bares zero relevance. Neither does the actual lawful activity that they were doing. A report was filed and a decision was made to speak to the driver. Once completed it was probably filed never to be considered ever again.

It's little things like chatting to people and seeing what's going on that allows the police to collate information and spot issues. Unfortunately, burglars do not walk around in stripy tops with masks, perverts do not were long coats with bags of sweets, bad people do not have that tattoed on their foreheads. They look like everyone else!!

[Dulce-Joy]

Bluescorpius, on 13 April 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

I wish to clarify a few points as some posters are missing the big story here. Nobody at any time approached me while I was sitting in a 'suspicious' manner. If they had, I could explain and then they go away better informed. While I was there, apart from the other car, there was nobody in the park, or the parking area, the road,the far distance or even on the river! The other car was just a coincidence he seemed like a travelling salesman type, who just happened to know of a quite area to have some lunch. He, by coincidence, pulled into the area a minute or so before me I mentioned I was disabled, but not to garner any sympathy or special dispensation. The point that should have been obvious was thus. Some disabled people like me are sometimes in a lot of pain and get tired. All I needed was a short rest of about ten minutes. Is that too much to ask! Does society grudge me that now! Should I just stand outside the car instead? I have used that parking area before, just like the locals and strangers alike with no problems. I even stayed near there for about thirteen years and nothing like this ever occurred. The police did do a PNC check and the result must have said to them that the car was registered to Motability Operations. That should have rang a bell that says perhaps the driver was disabled and just needed to sit there for a while. It would appear that this never occurred to them. I spoke to a sergeant for clarification so that if I knew what I was supposed to be doing wrong, then I could avoid it in the future all she would say was that I was sitting in my car in a suspicious manner. The 'caller' took the time to copy my registration number but did not think that my blue badge, clearly displayed, meant anything. The police also admit that they never bothered to ask what the other car driver was doing either. I ask again, why was I judged by that caller to be suspicious but not the other car? Logically, I cannot be acting suspicious when there was nobody in my eyeline to even see me resting there. Another reason to be angry is the initial approach by two officers who managed to go and knock on the wrong door!! It was early evening, clear and each letterbox have very large numbers. All my neighbours know of this visit now and are currently speculating what crime was involved. These officers did not even seem to know what the accusation was as they were asking was I in Pitcairngreen that morning. No I said, I was at Pitcairn, an area of Almonbank, in the afternoon. There is only about a two and a half mile difference of location. I did have to explain what geocaching is but they stated that thy really do know as several from their office do likewise. So, if I needed a rest for a few minutes and chose to locate in a parking area rather than park on the narrow roads round about, and there was nobody in the all purpose park to act suspicious too, what is the problem? Should I be worried with their swift action, after all one poster says their dammed if they do and dammed if they don't. Well, put it like this as just a little perspective. They acted quick enough although and it turned out that there was no substance to the allegation. Fair enough you say. Except, I hear that they are so stretched for resources and it is actually difficult to cope with the real crime - maybe, perhaps. Where I stay though, is in the grip of a major crime wave, and a lot of vulnerable people (like me for instance) are worried, and even dread leaving the doors. Yet after six months of fear of where will the next occurrence be, or will there be another murder, or who will be attacked next, the police are no further forward than the very first incident. If resources are scarce, should they be allocated where it would do the most good instead of hassling geocachers. Debate and rebuttal?

I completely understand and agree with what you are saying, Bluescorpius. Anymore these days it's like we are being told that for "Safety and Security" we are being protected from ourselves for our own good insteading treating us like the adults we are. Our personal rights are being taken away in the name of "safety" instead of people actually using their brains to assess the situation before jumping to conclusions (extremes). A person shouldn't have to explain themselves irregardless of what they are doing. Even if they say, "If you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't have a problem in explaining yourself". We shouldn't HAVE to explain ourselves. Suspicious is one thing, eccentric is quite another.

[sussamb]

Really? Where have you been the last 5 or 10 years? As someone has already posted criminals don't go around wearing striped t shirts and carrying bags labelled swag. Terrorists look like normal people. We need people to spot and report whatever they think is 'suspicious' and then allow the police or whoever to do what they think needs to be done. I'd rather be reported and questioned hundreds of times if it meant we didn't go through another 911 style attack or if it simply helped disrupt the low life who make all our lives a misery.

[Happy Humphrey]

Heard a few weeks ago (probably). "One of our neighbours had the police round the other day, asking questions. Funny bloke, bit of a loner. Next door said the police knocked on their door first by mistake, and they sent them to the right house. That's how we all got alerted. I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't been hanging around kids' playgrounds. Someone found out that's what the police were asking about. Didn't arrest him, like, but there's no smoke without fire I always say. My hubby's thinking of teaching him a lesson next time he sees him.".
But it's all worth it, as long as it leads to master terrorists being arrested.

My point is simply that I have some sympathy with the OP, in that it looks to have been badly handled. Surely a phone call would have been enough, and if the police had had real suspicions then they shouldn't have lied.

[Neath Worthies]

sussamb, on 20 April 2012 - 12:37 AM, said:

.... I'd rather be reported and questioned hundreds of times if it meant we didn't go through another 911 style attack or if it simply helped disrupt the low life who make all our lives a misery.

And there's the rub! Terrorists want to disrupt our normal way of life and to sow fear and suspicion. If a "normal" citizen is going to be stopped and questioned "hundreds of times" or more likely several times whilst going about their normal business the terrorists have won. I have no objection to being questioned if I am genuinely acting suspiciously but to be questioned on the say so of a "nosey neighbour" smacks very much of a police state.

The logical extension of such activities will be the imposition of a rule whereby the police or other quasi-police style body will be able to demand you "show your papers" and not carrying them will become an arrestable offence. Do we want that? I don't.

[sussamb]

So which would you rather have? Potentially being questionned or potentially being blown up?

[DrDick&Vick]

sussamb, on 20 April 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

So which would you rather have? Potentially being questionned or potentially being blown up?

I suggest that you give this one up as you will never win against 'It's my right' brigade.

[sussamb]

Yeah, guess you're right

[gazooks]

I was caching in the Lake District a couple of weeks back and we were heading back to the apartment in Grasmere and decided to do a few cache 'n' dashes on the way back. Stopped in an NT carpark and started looking for the cache in the dark (which I had found before) and while we were both searching around a pay and display machine a police car appeared.

The officer opened the window and said "Are you robbers ?" to which I replied "No we are Geocachers". The officer nodded his head and then asked if we had seen a certain car and then bid us goodnight and drove off. He must have known what geocaching was

This is the first time in 7 years of caching I have ever bumped into the law and it wasn't an unpleasant experience that others have endured. Mind you I was initialy worried - I mean it must have looked well suspicious

[Amberel]

gazooks, on 20 April 2012 - 04:40 AM, said:

This is the first time in 7 years of caching I have ever bumped into the law and it wasn't an unpleasant experience that others have endured. Mind you I was initialy worried - I mean it must have looked well suspicious

I was stopped on the riverbank at Kingston some years ago, and the policeman ended up looking for the cache with me (and finding it ). So my experience wasn't a bad one.

But I'm pretty much sitting on the fence on this one. I do believe we should co-operate with the police, but I also think the police should respond proportionately to any situation. I think on the whole they do, but it doesn't mean we should accept everything they might do, without question.

I don't think it is right to say that they should automatically investigate every single thing that is reported to them - they should first question the person who reports something suspicious, and determine if the suspicion has some foundation.

I can't form a view on the particular case that started the thread - we have only one side of the story, and even that one side isn't at all clear. Sending the police round to someone's house for no reason other than that they sat for a while, in their car, in a public parking place, doing nothing out of the ordinary, sounds way over the top. But we don't know what else happened, and it seems clear from the OP that sitting in the car wasn't the only thing they did during the visit.

Rgds, Andy

This post has been edited by Amberel: 20 April 2012 - 05:25 AM

[Guanajuato]

gazooks, on 20 April 2012 - 04:40 AM, said:

I was caching in the Lake District a couple of weeks back and we were heading back to the apartment in Grasmere and decided to do a few cache 'n' dashes on the way back. Stopped in an NT carpark and started looking for the cache in the dark (which I had found before) and while we were both searching around a pay and display machine a police car appeared.

The officer opened the window and said "Are you robbers ?" to which I replied "No we are Geocachers". The officer nodded his head and then asked if we had seen a certain car and then bid us goodnight and drove off. He must have known what geocaching was

This is the first time in 7 years of caching I have ever bumped into the law and it wasn't an unpleasant experience that others have endured. Mind you I was initialy worried - I mean it must have looked well suspicious

A bit of history on that one - There'll be a story in the Westmorland Gazette a couple of times a year about a spate of robberies from Pay and Display car park machines, or from cars. So the police are quite alert to people snooping around car parks on an evening. And quite rightly too.
As for the OP, it does seem a rather OTT response from the police - a simple phone call would've been a more sensible use of police time, unless the car was just passing anyway.
I once had the joy of being muggled by a policeman, sort of. I was looking for a cache and a police car arrived and he started following me (on foot), so I stopped and asked him if I could help. He was actually patrolling the spot because people had been stealing flagstones from the riverside.

[sdg2g08]

Quote

The officer opened the window and said "Are you robbers ?"

Does that ever work?

[Clipper247]

sdg2g08, on 20 April 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Quote

The officer opened the window and said "Are you robbers ?"

Does that ever work?

You would be surprised

[ColandNix]

We often pretend to be Dogging just to blend in with the others in a car park to avoid suspicion!!

Joking aside, I initially thought the OP had a good point as people park up for many reason's including; to use their mobile, programme their Sat Nav, eat their lunch, get out of the office at lunch time or take a rest, but I'm starting to think there was more to it after reading these conflicting quotes:

Bluescorpius, on 13 April 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

I wish to clarify a few points as some posters are missing the big story here. Nobody at any time approached me while I was sitting in a 'suspicious' manner. If they had, I could explain and then they go away better informed. While I was there, apart from the other car, there was nobody in the park, or the parking area, the road,the far distance or even on the river!

Bluescorpius, on 14 April 2012 - 07:30 AM, said:

My theory on this that I was not in my car when my registration was taken. It may have been a knee jerk action of a nearby mother I observed when I walked away. She seemed overly 'firm' with a very young girl who was screaming and trembling in fear. She perhaps thought that I would report her for the harsh treatment because of the way she gripped the childs' wrist and yanked her away. There was no need for that, but I did not wish to be involved. She may have claimed I was sitting in my car at that point, hence no silver car mentioned as he came later, in case the police questioned her and she could discredit me - only a theory. I did not linger when this was going on.

[Dulce-Joy]

sussamb, on 20 April 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

So which would you rather have? Potentially being questionned or potentially being blown up?

Oh my goodness! Can we say 'going to the extreme'? How often are people "blown up" than not? That's one of the reasons why we are losing our rights.

[sussamb]

yep, I accept that was a bit extreme

Just I get fed up with people who complain about the odd bit of hassle and then also complain that 'the police aren't doing their job to stop muggers, burglars etc etc etc'. Think in this case there's more to this than the OP originally told us, as ColandNix points out above.

[HugoRune1965]

One thing that struck me about the account was this:

Bluescorpius, on 13 April 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

These officers did not even seem to know what the accusation was as they were asking was I in Pitcairngreen that morning. No I said, I was at Pitcairn, an area of Almonbank, in the afternoon.

What if they were investigating a different incident that happened in the morning and were checking to see if the report was somehow linked?

[Haggis Hunter]

Dulce-Joy, on 20 April 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

sussamb, on 20 April 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

So which would you rather have? Potentially being questionned or potentially being blown up?

Oh my goodness! Can we say 'going to the extreme'? How often are people "blown up" than not? That's one of the reasons why we are losing our rights.

More often than you think? Here is a link to the worst IRA bombings in the UK. Quite a lot on that list with a lot of deaths isn't there? And that is only the worst done by one group!!

Some people have short memories!

[thehoomer]

To be honest, I would rather the police be over cautious than lame & disinterested.
It is unfortunate but inevitable that a few people will get embroiled or upset in this process. The police can’t get it right every time....none of us can.

[team tisri]

sussamb, on 20 April 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

So which would you rather have? Potentially being questionned or potentially being blown up?

That argument doesn't work simply because you still have to draw lines somewhere.

Should we all be required to walk around naked so nobody can conceal a weapon about their person? After all, would you rather be naked everywhere you go or potentially be stabbed by a psycho?

Should we ban people from carrying luggage on the London Underground because their suitcase could conceal a bomb? Sure, it would make travelling across town mighty inconvenient for tourists but hey, it's better to inconvenience a few people if the alternative is potentially being blown up, right?

[sussamb]

Now THAT is taking it to the extreme

[Oxford Stone]

Another GC bomb scare today (apologies if this seems wrong place - but I daresay there will be a red-faced CO out there)...

http://www.oxfordmai...es_Oxford_park/

Intriguing thing is - there are no trads in University Parks - but some fiendish mysteries in the area! Wonder which one it was?

This post has been edited by Oxford Stone: 27 January 2013 - 10:36 AM

[Haggis Hunter]

Oxford Stone, on 27 January 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

Another GC bomb scare today (apologies if this seems wrong place - but I daresay there will be a red-faced CO out there)...

http://www.oxfordmai...es_Oxford_park/

Intriguing thing is - there are no trads in University Parks - but some fiendish mysteries in the area! Wonder which one it was?

BOMB SCARE!!! Where exactly did it say that in the report? I read suspicious package, which could be anything!

[simplysup]

I quite like the fact it was played down - park only closed for a few mins, once the suspect package was confirmed as a geocache all was ok, etc. A few of the comments on the story from non-cachers, are fun - like, "I bet the knowledgeable officer was single". I thought I was the only stereotypical cacher

[Oxford Stone]

Haggis Hunter, on 27 January 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Oxford Stone, on 27 January 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

Another GC bomb scare today (apologies if this seems wrong place - but I daresay there will be a red-faced CO out there)...

http://www.oxfordmai...es_Oxford_park/

Intriguing thing is - there are no trads in University Parks - but some fiendish mysteries in the area! Wonder which one it was?

BOMB SCARE!!! Where exactly did it say that in the report? I read suspicious package, which could be anything!

Bomb scare, security alert... 6 and 2 3s... they get fairly desperate for news at the Oxford Mail! There has been anti-vivisection hooha in that area, thus the... security alert.

[flipflopnick]

Had many conversations with a police officers. Never two officers together in Cumbria. Two tales come to mind relevant to caching-ish.
Every day pass through Lakeside, near Ulverston, Cumbria. Decided to stop and take photographs for Waymarking purposes.
Photographed Eastvilla, which has a fire insurance crest still on display. <-- Not yet a WM Cat.

Two days later a flourescent jacketed officer (not subtle at all) knocks on my door asking me what I was doing in Lakeside on that Tuesday. Showed him the pix. Turns out someone's soon to be ex-wife thought I had been sent by the soon to be ex-husband to spy on her.
My neighbours are used to police around our area as the youth have got nowt to do but cause trouble. And Cumbria only has two perhaps three officers on duty for the whole county at any one time. The rest are patrolling M6 motorway in blinged fast cars.

Second occasion was at Tongland HEP Station, which is near Kirkcudbright. Getting dark, taking pix of old HEP, built 1934? This time local policeman saw me taking pix of HEP and roadside milestone. Thought I was up to no good, presumably. Called in reinforcements, who appeared within minutes. Both cars then forced me off the road into dead end. Lights flashing. No sirens. Did not want to alert my accomplices, presumably.

After being breathalysed and questioned, running a check. Discovering I had a prior. Told you I am nefarious, they had to let me go. Too dark to continue with pix so went on my way. Causing mayhem presumably as I went.

I realise, police are doing the job we ask them to do. To keep society in order for the rest of us. To make sure the majority behave respectfully to each other.

I have various membership cards in my camera cache bag, which I can show inquisitive muggles. But a SLUG survey card beats them all.
Not been questioned caching yet as have dog and female accomplice fellow cacher with me when out caching. Less suspicious.

Must go to prepare a disguise for next solo outing :-)

[drsolly]

Next time a Member of the Public asks me what I'm doing, I'm going to reply "I'm acting suspiciously".

I'll then watch carefully as his brain processes this.

[Seaglass Pirates]

For the record I have to agree with Humph on this one.

Interfered with for sitting in his car .... out of context LOL. What a joke. So in a car park ... fine. But out of context ... and somehow we are at being blown up and criminals casing the joint. Hmmmm

Other out of context stuff is fun...

A man is naked in his house with the curtains open and a woman walks by .... she reports him and he gets done for exposure. She does the same thing and he gets done for being a peeping tom.

I can't wear underpants out in the street. Well I can but an officer will probably be called and have a quiet word. And yet I can wear just swimming trunks all day anywhere as long as its nearish to a beach/pool

I used to look after kids with autism. In a supermarket once one of them gets hit in the back with a trolly by a large lady. "Watch what you're doing you fat f'ng b**ch he says to her. She was .... agape and then furious and lecturing and on and on it went. Eventually I was able to get a word in edgewise and explained about the autism. She became apologetic and was very contrite and humble. Same event, same circumstance - difference in context.

These are all fun and I get them ... investigated for ... suspiciously sitting in your car out of context LOL. Sad.

And the person that asked how old Humph was ... old enough to understand irony and too old to understand your rudeness.

Blaze away ... i'll call 101 and report you for internet bullying

[Luffness]

drsolly, on 05 February 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

Next time a Member of the Public asks me what I'm doing, I'm going to reply "I'm acting suspiciously".

I'll then watch carefully as his brain processes this.

Love the brutal honesty here DrSolly. I'll see you and raise you sunshine!

[martin&lindabryn]

link to a reply from a police officer blackhorse221
with some good advice


I know that he is American but it is still good advice

This post has been edited by martin&lindabryn: 01 March 2013 - 11:51 AM